S/PV.294 Security Council

1 thought it better to follow the procedure proposed yesterday by the Belgian representative, name1y, to hear at once those members of the Council who are prepared to speak on the resoc lution itse1f ._... 1see that no one wishes to speak on the United States resolution, so we will proceed to consider the questionnaire. \ " As 1 saïd yesterday [29? d meeting], it is my intention that we sbuld iinish considering the questionnaireat this morning's meeting in any case. 1 think that if we fail to do so" the questionnaire itself will ,have lost its purpose, and there will be no "abject in sending it. Consequently, our discussion must not be prolonged beyond the present meeting. Mr. TARASENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) '(translated trom Russian): The Security' Couneil must recognize the fact that the present situation in Palestine is an extreme1y serious one. No one \\ri1l deny that this situation ,constitutes a threat ta peace in the area of the Near and Middle East. That fact alone shows that ~' question deserves prompt attention and prompt action on the part of the Security Council". 1 will now refer to yesterday's discussion. 1 do not know what documents the .Be1gian representative has in mind~ . What documentary evidence cloes thé Belgian representative hold to admit that the Security Council, should undertake,"a prompt discussion of the events in Palestine?" But that is not the point. What is serious··is· the facto that an armed struggle is taking place in Palestine, a struggle whi,ch is practically developing'into a war between certain States of the Near East, causing numerous casualties and great destruction. It is ~ serious fact, for instance, that a big city, such as Tel Aviv, is being subjected to constant air bomçarclment resulting in casualtîes among the peaceful population, among women and children. , .Nor can 1 agree with the opinion of the repre. sentative of Colombia, who attaches primary importance to the information that the Truce Commission ought to send. We have reçeived statemeIits from both sides-from a number of Arab States and from the representatives of the Jewish State. AU speak of military operations and all confirm the gravity of the situation in Palestine. ':fhat being so, how does the Truce Coriunission come into the matter? As the representative of France, who is ~ow "the President of the Security Council, pointed out yesterday, it Moreover, the Security Council would be waiting for information which would not make any difference to the state of affairs or thrnw any more light on those events than has the information supplied by the countries concerned. The Ukrainian delegation· therefore insists upon the immediate consideration of this question and on the immediate adoption of an appropriate decision in order to put an end to the armed struggle in Palestine. Mr. TSIANG (China): In the face of the serious situation in Palestine 1 share the desire or quick action. In principle, 1 am opposed to the use of filibustering in the General Assembly, in its C01IlJ."'llÎttees or, here, in' the Security Cauncil. 1 should a:Iso add that, in principle, 1 am opposed to railroading measures through within a few hours. The questionnaire before us is evidently an important document. It is very skïlfully dra'Wn up. l am not a lawyer, and 1 come from a country where l~wyers are held to he necessary evils. Therefore, 1 do not pretend that 1 can uncover the intentions of this paper, and in arder to avoid anyaccusation of filibustering, 1 am only going to suggest one minor change in this list of. questions. 1 suggest that the first question be worded a little differently. As it now , stands, the question reads: déceler les Une mée "(a) Are armed e1ements of your armed forces or irregular forces spoI:lsoredby your Gavernments now operating in Palestine?" 1 would amend this question ta read: "(a) Are armed e1ements of your armed forces or irregular forces sponsored by your Governments .now operating in areas of Palestine where the Jews are in thé majority?"2 If that ,change were accepted, then 1 would have to suggest a change in the corresponding question addressed to ·the Provisional Govern- . ment of Israel. This is question (b) and the amended question would read: " (b) Do you have ~rmed forces operating-in the areas where the Arabs are in the majority?" We think it is wrong for an Arab army to. invade a town or a district where the Jews are in the majority, and we think it is equally wrong for a Jewish army to be ID towns, cities or districts where the Arabs are in the majority. .·Mr. VAN LANOENHOVE (BeIgium) (translated trom French): Allow me to dear up, in a few \vords, a nllsunderstanding whij:h seems to have arisen in·the minci of the Ukrainian representative regarding the remarks 1 made yesterday [293rd meeting]•. 1 certainly did not ask the Council to refrain from ~aking a decision; on the contrary, 1 urged it to consider the United States draft resolutiofJ. at once. But, Mr. Presidents when you repeated that proposai this morning, you found that none of· the members of the Cmuncil, not even those who .most insist on our taking immediate action, were prepared to express an opinion on the subject. Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : At fust sight, it seems ta me ·that the change suggested bythe representative of China to question Ca). which is to he addressed to the Arab States would constitute an i..'l1provenient, and 1 should certainly he in favour of making that change. r only wish to suggest to the representative of China that if the new text proposedby him is .accepted, 1 think ~ consequential change would be required in question (c), which states: . "(c) On what basis is it claimed that stJch . forces are entitled to enter these areas• ..?" or words to that effect. 1 "~(cl On what basis is it claimed that such forces are entitled ta enter Palestine and conduet operations there?" 1 think this weuld have to read: Mahmoud Bey FAWZI (Egypt): 1 should like first tosay a word or two in connexion with the changes suggested by the representative of China in question (a) of the first set of questions and in·question(b) of the thïrd set. When he spoke of the Jews or the Arabs being the majority in one area or the o~er, 1suppose he meant to base theestimate of the situation on the official statistics so far available to the Security Council, and not·on· those resultirig from the changing phases of the military.or physical condition of the population ln present circumst~nces. Some Arabs' might have been chased away from their homes, and some Jews equally so. Therefore, we cannot base any stable.calculation on such a basis. 1 do suppose that this is what he meant; and unless 1 am contradicted by the representative of China, 1 shall sa assume. .J'estime Ml'. TSIANq (China): 1 find the ~uggestion of the representative of the United Kingdom eminently reasonable, and 1 should like to see a corresponding change made in question (c) of the first part of the questionnaire. 1 should ailla like to state that the interpretation which the representative of Egn..; placed upon my phraseology is correct. When we speak of majorities or of minorities we refer, of course, to the population in ordiriary times, as reflected in the official statistics. There is a third point which 1 should like' to mention. While J, personally, dO!1ot attach much impor1;ance to laoels, nevertheless in an .official· document of this kïnd,a certain amount of Î1nportan.ce is attached to the phrase "ProvislOnal Government of Israel". The President "himself exteI.1ded an invitationyesterday to "the representativeof'the Jewish Agency," and that . The PRESIDENT (translatçd from French): l, calI upon the representative of the- Jewish Agency 'and ask him ta be as brief as possible. Mr. EBAN (Jewish Agcncy for Palestine): 1 have only two brief comments to make. The representative of Egypt said that he had no information as to -:.he nature of Jewish authorities now functioning in Palestine and it seems, therefore, to be our duty, under rule 39 of the rules of procedure-which makes it incumbent upon us to supply infonnation to the Security Council -to fill in the gap in bis knowledge. The Provislonal Government of the State of Israel is the oilly de facto recognized governmental authority operating' in respect of the Jewish inhabitants of the territory of the former Palestine Mandate, and it daims and exercises jurisdiction within the areas assigned to the Jewish State by the resolution of the General Assembly 181 (II) of 29 November 1947. 'That situation seems to have a bearing on the address to whichthes,e questions. should be directed. We understand that the only object of these questions is to elicit information, and th.~.t no principle of status or of recognition is implied in addressing them at' this time to that address. From that practical stanàpoint, it is worth bearing in mind that there àoes not exist in Palesti.,e any authority other than the Provisional Gdvernment of Israel which would b~ competent ta give answers to any of the questions. The first asks, "Over which areas of.Palestine do you actually exercise control at the present time?" . There is no other Jewish authority in Palestine which exercises any control anywhere. Then there are further questions relating ta information concerned with the operation of armed forces-"Do you have armed forces operating. . ." in this or the other area~1 Again, no other body but this Frovisional G0vernment of Israel 'has armed forces operating under its command, direction· or jurisdiction in the country. It seems, therefore, if 1 may make the suggestion, that we should think of these questions at this stage not in terms of recognition or status, which are not involved, but in terms of the prac- , tical necessity to elicit information from the'only body: competent to give it. My other comment concerns the definition of . areas in relation to the amendment suggestedby • therepresentative of China, and everything here hinges upon the meaning of the word "area". Here again, the oilly definite area of jurisdiction which the Jewish inhabitants of the former mandated Territory of.Palestine recognize, is the area Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : Since.the point has been raised, 1 should like to say that l had intended, at the proper time, io make a comment on this heading of the last section of the questionnaire-"Questions to the . Provisional Government of Israel"-and l think that comment may perhaps ·have been r~,.ldered all the more necessary by certain remarks made by the representative of the Jewish Agency. This questionnaire has of course been drafted by the United States delegation, and it was therefore natural-perhaps iD. the circumstances inevitable-that it' should draft that headiug "Questions to the Provisional Government of , Israel". l am sure that my United States colleague will realize that this causes me sorne slight embarrassment. My Government !las not recognized the Provisional Government of Israel, and l want, therefore, to make it quite cléar that if l let this phrase pass, it does not prejudge in any way the attitude of my Government in regard to the question of recognition, and no inference of any kind is to be drawn from that facto

Before calling upon the Egyptian representative, l should·like, with his permission, to make the following çomment: This questionnaire .~lust not, of course, prejudice our future decisions on the substance. lts oruy purpose is to obtain information. This doe not mean that the questionnaire should no~ cover valious possible assumptions; it means that it must not exclude any of them. The Chinese .representative's .remark regarding, in particular, paragraph (a) at the beginnint~ of the questbnnaire, strikes· me as being very helpful. However, in order not to prejudice the possible future situation in any way, l wonder whether it would not be wise to act on his sugge~tion in order to supplement the question rather than to amend it. In other words, 1 think we should ask for information on forces now operating: (1) in Palestine; and (2) in the predominantly Jewish areas of Palestine. Otherwise we shmùd in fact appear, thouglr we have not discussed the matter, to be taking no further interest, from now on, in the fact that these forces are operating in the Arab part of Palestine. It is quite possible that we shall take that position, but l think it would be advisable not to prejudice the issue. Would our Chinese colleague, thereforç, presently tell us whether he considers such a formula acceptable? ln this connexion-and here 1 do not quite agree with the Egyptian representative-I think that the ward "authority", which IS sufficiently broad and indefinite, would be the best one ta use. Now, if we were ta say: "Questions ta the Jewish Agency", that phrase would 'not fit the first question asked: "Over which areas of Palestine do you actually exercise control at' the present time?" 1 think the ward "authority", which has no precise signification and which can mean any kind of de facto authority, might he. used. Mahmoud Bey FAWZI (Egypt): 1 do not want -to delay unduly the discussion of the matter ~aw before the Security Council. 1 do not want to indulge in any hair-splitting or delve deeply into all sort of niceties of interpretation. However~ certain matters which. have been dealt with herehave such a bearing on the essential phases of the whole question of Palestine that, for my part, 1 cannat let them pass in complete silence; 1 have to express my opinion on them. It has been said, for example, that to speak of the "Provisional Government of Israel" does not involve any commitment. Bath the President and the representative of the tTnitedKingdom said that, if the questionnaire were addressed in that manner, it would not entail any commitment on the part of the Security Council. Not only can 1 not subscribe to such an-allow me to say with aIl due respect-easy-goin6" way of dealing with such an essential and important matter, but 1 must protest most vehemently against any suggestion that the Security Council should address anything ta a "Provisional Government of Israel". 1 think that is most prejudicial. It does' not s'eem to have occurred at all to the representative of the United States to speak, for example, of the State of Palestine, which would naturally include the whole of Palestine. In my view, at least, as 1 have said before, there is a State of Palestine, a single, independent Palestine which has existed since the instant the Mandate was terminated and which will continue ta eXist. 1 now come to the statement of the representative of China that we might address the questions ta· the Jewish Agency. 1 have already indicated the stand of my delegJ.tiun in this regard. Our understaIJ.ding is that the Jewish Agency ceased ta exist with the end of the Mandate. Someone might ask, "How shall we Mr. TSIANq (China): ln deference ta the authority of the President, 1 should be glad ta accept the suggestion he made with regard ta my amendment and the title to he given ta the third group of questions. When 1 introduced my amend:p1ent, 1 thought 1 made it clear that the word ~'areas" meant towns, cities and districts, districts of course being the unit in rural administration. However, since the representative of the Jewish Agency made a point here, 1 think it would avoid any misunderstanding of these questions if we inserted in parentheses, after the word "areas", the words "towns, cities and districts", in both groups of questions. Mr. EL-KHOURI (Syria): 1 did not discuss the cIraft resolution submitted, by the United States delegation because 1 considered' that any action which might be taken under Article 39 of the Charter, or a decision as to whether a breach of the peace or threat to the peacé exists, would depend upon,the replies received to these questions inten.ded to find out what the situation is, to know what is going on there, what the excuses of both parties are, and how they justify their position. For this re'ason, 1 thought that we should discuss these questions thoroughly, that they should be sent out first, and that the answers to them should he available before the Security Council takes any decision or passes any resolution, with respect to the situation there, under Article 39 of the Charter or to that ~ffect under any other Article. 1 took' the opportunity yesterday to speak about these questions [293rd meeting] and 1 mentioned several points which 1 am not going ta tepeat today. The suggestions made by the representative of China cover sorne of the points 1 raised yesterday, but nôt all of them. Since the questions are now being discussed, 1 should like to caU the attention of the Security Council ta the lack' of sirnilarity existing between the questions being put ta' the Arabs and at the , same time to the Jews. '1 feel that those ques- For instance, the Arabs are being asked about ". . . your armed forces or irregular forces sponsored by your Governments now operating in Palestine..." Why is such a question, with regard to irregular forces or persons, not being asked of the Jews? 1 refer to the forces and persons who are committing the worst actions in Palestine, who are terrorjsts, a..'1d to others who are working with these forces and under them. No question is being asked of the Jews compelling them to give an explanation concerning these people, howmany of them there are, and who they are. Then, another question which is being asked of the Arabs: on what basis are the Arab States going into Palestine, since Palestine is respected here as a foreign territory? No question along the same lines is being asked of the Jews, as . to whether they are receiving reinforcements from non-Palestinian sources, or whether they are still receiviiigsuch reinforcements,' or whether they expect to receive some, According ~o the Press, it has been announced that tens of thousands are ready to go to Palestine from Eastern JEurope, the Black Sea regions, the Adriatic, Bulgaria, and other places. They are foreigners who are coming into Palestine te help the Jews with anns, ammunition, with everything. · Why should an investigation be made with regard to the Aràbs who are neighbours of Palestine, who are entering Palestine to help the Arabs of Palestine, while no such question being asked with regard to the foreign Jews and non-Jews who are coming into Palestine from the whole world to help the Jews in Palestine with arms and ammunition? 1 think such 'question should be asked, 50 that we may be able to balance the rights on brth sides, and determine whether or not both are doing the same thing. · 1 have another question in mind which 1 think it would be appropriate to ask the Jews. We know that the Jews have taken certain action recently. They have proclaimed their independent State, in opposition to the United Nations and without any justification for such a proclamation. 1 wish to apologize for stressing the legal angle very often, but 1 do that because 11 know that it isneœssarythat the law should be considered and respected. We are trying ta keep law and order throughout the whole world. 1 think it appropriate to respect the law here in the Council, and we should actin accordance with ·international law and aU the laws by which we are bound. We can only live if we respect the law, and international law should be respected here. 1 say that the Jews cannot fiÎl.d any justification for procla.imiI).g their State. They are not living alone there; their right has been contested; they have been living under a Mandate for a long period. They have no de facto authority such as that mentioned by the United States Government when it recognized the Provisional Government 'of Palestine as the de facto authority for the State of Israel. That action was another mistake. It is a coinmitment by the United States, and the United States Gpvernment had no right to do that. The United States is a sponsor and a Member of the United Nations, and one of the perman,ent members of the SecurityCouncil, and it is trying to direct the world and determine arder and law for the world. The United States Government should not have permitted itself the mistake and blunder of recognizing aState which ought not to have been recognized at aIl. It should have condemned, this proclamation. The United States -Government speaks of a "de facto authority", but we know that a de facto authority is an authority which has been exercised for a long time; it is an authority which has a budget, which has authorization, which has an administration, which has organs, which has a police office, and where eveiything 'is complete and unopposed. If an authority exists for sorne period of time, it may be recognized as a de fact!) authority. But let us consider the Jews of Palestine: have they been exercising a de facto authority in Palestine? How could that have been done? Juridically ,speaking, Palestine was under the Mandate, and the Mandatory Power was vested with aIl the authority of administration, legislation, judiciary, and everything. What administrative authority coitld they have had to enable them to become a de facto authority in the space of one minute? They· proclaimed their State at 6 p.m. New York time. It was recognized as a de facto authority at 6.02 p.m. It cannot be stated that an authority which is created two minutes earlier ~an suddenly become a de fat:!.p authority. Is that justice? By what reason or common sense can-th~t be accepted? The United States committed a blunder and we ought to enquire about it. Smce we are'a'ddressing, questions to aIl the States concerned in this matter; 1 think e Security Council would do weIl to âddress ." If thisde facto authority existed while the Mandate was still in force, it was illegal because internationally and legally speaking such an authority could not be recognized as .existing in Palestine .during the Mandate. The Mandate was in force until 6 p.m. New York time on 14 May 1948. Whenwas the Sta:te declared? At .that very minute. When was it recognizecl by the United States of America? Two minutes iater. 1 do not know what to call such an action. Is it considered that the people of the world have no understanding:' Is it thoughtthat the people of the world are such imbeciles that they will accept such an action blind1y and without question? 1 will speak later on the proposaI of the representative of the United States, when we have discusse~ these questions and when we have received the answers from those to whom the questions are addressed. 1 should be glad if the representative of the United States, for whom 1 have a very great respect, would be kind enough to elarify these points which are vague to me, and if he will excuse me for speaking in this way. Ido so only because 1 should like to understand the full truth. Perhaps the United . States, which has so many jurists who are well experienced in matters of law, knows things which we do not know. My understanding of the matter may be erroneous. If it can give me an explanation, it will be enlightening not only me but all the members of the Security Council and all the peoples of the world who are in doubt about it. 1 have heard from some of my colleagues in " the American Society 'of International Law. Certainly in the White House and the State Department there are great and learned men who do not take decisions lightly by reading signs in the sand. They must have studied this action thoroughly and must have taken it with great authbrity. Therefore, we should be thankful if they would give us information on these points. . 1 hope that the President will ask the represeritative of the United States if he would be able ta answer my questions either now or at a 'later meeting. The PRE'SIDENT (translated from French): In reply ta the Syrian representative's observations, 1 must point out that the recognition of a Government is not a matter for whiéh the United Nations is responsible. It depends on the free judgment of Governments, and 1 do 'not think 1 am entitled ta put a question to the United States representative regarding a step taken by the United States Government with.i.n its governmental prerogatives. Rence we must regard this merely as a question having been asked by the Syrian representative during the discussion. Mr. TARASENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (translated from Russian): Our fears have been justified. Instead of taking up the immediate discussion of events in Palestineevents which entail loss of human life and destruction-the Security Council has allowed itself to be side-tracked'and is now engaged in the discussion of questions which'could wait to be settled and which are not necessary in order to take a decision with regard to the cessation of fighting in Palestine. . Indeed, the mere discussion of the 'question- ,naire could go on indefinitely and today's experiene" shows that this could happeno In aIl probability we shall have to wait a long time for replies to the questionnaire. When the replies are received, another lengthy discussion will begin, and addition~ ~ questions will arise. Then there will be further discussion of the questions, more waiting for replies, a discussion of the replies received and so on, ad infinitum. Meanwhile events will continue to take their course, the fighting will go on and the number of casualties among the pOp'u~ation will grow. Unfortunately, this was the procedure of the late League of Nations, and it was one of the reasons for its wealr..ness and helplessness in solving serious problems. Unfortunately, the same

1 noted just now that we were not at present in a position to discuss the United States draft resolution, and it is because no one has asked to speak on that matter that we have resumed consideration of the questionnaire. For the time being, we will continue to examine the ques-. tionnaire. ' 1 merely repeat that 1 do not intend to close the meeting until. we have completed that examination. ' Mr. EL-KHOURI (Syria): 1 only wish to comment-on the statement of the President to the effêct that the action of the United States Governmentdid not conèern the United Nations. 1 did-not indicate that th~ representative of the United States would be compelled to give me a reply. 1 merely said that if he wished ta give me a reply now or at any.other time, 1 would be happy to hear such a reply. 1 did not indicate' that 1 wanted sqch a 'reply by means of a Security Council resolution,. and 1 am. not now proposmg that the .Securlty Coun.cil should address such a questIOn to the Umted States Government. . My question was orny put to the representative of the United States. If he does not wish to give me a reply now, 1 would consider the matter later on as to how 1 could receive the information 1 require from the United States on this matter of recognition Sir Alexander CADOGAN (United Kingdom) : This questionnaire was only submitted to us yesterday afternoonand, consequently, hitherto this morning, 1have been acting without instruc· tions. My instructions, however, have just now beenreceived. 1 am happy to see that, sa far, .1 have not gone wrong, but my instructions do include one ot two points which Ishould like to add. In the first place, my Government takes note of the heading ta the last group of questions, entitl~d "Questions to the Provisional Government of Israel". As 1 had anticipated, my Government sees objections to that, but 1 am happy to be able to inform the Security Council that on the instructions of my Government-'1 could support the President's proposaI, which was, 1 think, to the efIect that this heading should be: "Questions to the Jewish authorities in Palestine". MY Govern~ent suggests a~~ing. to th~t ccor outside Palestzne?" That additIOn 15 motlvated by the report that Jewish forces have penetrated into Lebanese territory. There is one other point. They instruct me to request that another question be added. It would come appropriately, l think, after question (c) in the last section of questions. This 'question would read: - "Have you arranged' for the entry into Palestine in the near future of men of military age from outside Palestine? If so, what are the numbers and where are ·they coming from?" Mr. EBAN (Jewish Agency for Palestine): l have two very brief remarks. First, there seems· to be general agreement that no purpose would be served by a delay arising from à discussion of the address to which these questions should be sent. We would certainly have no objectîon to the term "Jewish authority in Palestine" being used here, although it would be only honest to point out that the answer would only be forthcoming from, the Provisional Government of Israel. The question of whether the existence of that Government is desirable . or not need not here arise. Sorne people would like that chicken to go back to that egg, but sorne would not. However, that is not a question we should like to be prejudiced by a discussion here. ' Sel.,-ùdly; l would wish to include an addition on a point not covered here, relating to military operations..The Security Council might be interested not ônly in invasion by land, but also in bombardment by air, and, in order to obtain a complete picture, it would seem essential to ask the authorities addres.JCd here whether aircraft under tlI,eir control have or are engaged in the bombardment of cities and villages, and, if so, how they justify such action. Mr. AUSTIN (United States of America): l want to have it understood by the representative of Syria. that what l am about to say in reply-though not in 'answer, for l shall not answer for reasons that l shall state-ought not to be regarded in àny'way as a reflection upon him or a challenge to our friendship. Personally, l respect him very much, not·only for bis great learning, but hr his urbanity, for his delightful 1 should regard it as hig~y improper for me ta admit that any country on earth can question the sovereignty of the United St&tesof America in the exercise of that high politicàl act of recognition of the de facto status of aState. Moreoyer, 1 would not :lCLnit here, by implication or by direct answer, that there exists a' trib~nal of justice or of any other kind, anywhere, that can pass judgment upon 'L'le legality or the validity of that act of my counrry. There were certain pmvers and certain rights of a sovereign State which were not yielded by . any of the Members who signed the United Nations Charter and in particular this power to recognize the de facto authority of a provisional Government was not yielded. When it was exercised by my Government, it was done as a practical step, in recognition of· realities: the existence of things, and the recognition of a change that had actually taken place. 1 am certain that no nation on éarth has any right ta question that, or to lay down a proposition that a certain length of time of the.èxercise of de facto authority must elapse before that authority can be recognized. Therefore, 1 do not answer these questions, and it is solely.for that reason that 1 do not answer them, because ~ere aIready is an answer. 1 think that the discussion. of the questionnaire has been useful. Many of the suggestions to me seemed to be good ones, but the particular criticism of the heading of the third set of questions has no validity. It is a spurious daim. The United States has recognized the Provisional Government of Israel, and whenever it refers to that authority in any paper of its own volition, it will calI it the Provisional Government of Israel. 1 say that this debate on this point is without any reason. When introducing these qUf.'..stions, 1 said in my statement: "The Security Council may wish to put to the principal authorities a number of questions. . . "1 am submitting the type' of questions that .-we think should be propounded to al~ oi the parties interested in the following s'lbstance" [293rd meeting]. Thus we did invite new questions and changes in those which we submitted. The changes which have beeIi suggeste<;l are nearly aIl entirely satisfactory to the representatives of the United States here, and 1 shall not resist in any way any other suggestions or changes which the Security Council wishes to make. A rather interesting coincidence cornes to niy mind with respect to the Provisional Government of Israel. The representative of Syria presided over the Security, Council when the question arose as to whether the Republic of Indonesia should be so far recognized as to be called to the table of the Security Council, and here is the reasoning upon which that inchoate Government-not yet recognized-wa.-; accorded the privilege of coming to the table under Article 32. The President, Mr. El-Khouri, said: "The discussion is now over, and we have to proceed to a vote on this point-that is, whether the representative of the Indonesian Republic should be invited to participate in the discussion in the Security Council cif the question now before it. <;As to the determination or definition of sovereignty and the degree of sovereignty which the Indonesian Republic possesses now, l think that is beyond our discussion. We have nothing to do with that. We.are not defining sovereignties now. Sov~reignty has several prerogatives. l think the Indonesian'Republic may be enjoying sorne. of them and may not be enjoying others. However, the invitation to participate in this discussion and to study the problem now presented ta the Security Co uncil does not necessitate that this State enjoy all the prerogatives and ex~rcise aIl the qualifications of a sovereignty. The ward 'State' which appears in Article 32 does not indicate what type ,of state is being referred to. "There is the United States of America and there is the State of Miçhigan. The latter.has a certain amount of sovereignty. It has sovereignty in legislation. For instance, the State of Michigan has laws, taxation, and other sovereign rights. But in regard to currencyor foreign representatian, it does not have sovereign right . . . The representative of Egypt has asked a question which 1 am willing-to answer-and not merely respond to. He asked, what do you mean byArab areas? When: we use that te~m we mean those areas outside the territory oî the ProvisionalGovemm.ent of Israel in Palestine. And. the area of the Provisional Government of Israel inPalestme has been described in the proclamation of that State-if 1 remember correctly-as it was described in the General Assembly resolution of 29 November 1947.•Hence, there is 'a detinite, clear-cut geographical boundary of 1 what we mean by"Arab areas". Ibelieve that Ihavecovered aIl the questions which were addressed to me. If 1 have not, 1 should like to have anytliat 1 may have over- ", lo()ked .caIled to my attention. If 1 have covered aIl the questions, then 1 come to this conclusion: the sending of this questionnaire' to the persons addressed in the manner setJorth in the questionnaire.:-or to the same authority in any other manner-Ïfl not intended ,toembarra.'Ss any member of the Secu.rity Council with respect ta his actîon or 4is judgment, but is intended. solely to obtain the information which the Security Council requires so that it may be asound ground for whatever decision it may make and for that action which is described in the Charter in such perfect language: ."to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace." After tkeinterpretation~Mr. Austin continued kis remarks. My attention has been called to the possibility of m.isundçrstanding ID my questionnaires. 1 warit it understood thai the first question .addressed to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Yemen, Ml'. :MALIK (LebanoJ;!.): The representative of the United Kingdom, in bis last intervention, mentioned-that, accon:i41g to information he had officially. received, the Jewish forces had penetrated into the territory of my own country. He therefore sugg~ted that an amendment be introduced to question (b) under the third group of questions suggested by the United States. It would seem to me that it is only fair to alsoinsert a corresponding question in group one 'of the set of questionsJ suggestE1:d by the United States and addressed to-the Arab Gover:nments, .aslcing them if violation of their territlJries has occurred in any way by foreign troops. I would therdore suggest, as an additional qm:stion to group one of the set of questions suggested by the United States, in the series before us, the' following question: "Have Jewish forces violated your frontiers and penetrated your territork-s and what damage have theydône?" It seems to me only fair to obtain accurate information from both sides and not only from one side. My second remark relates to questions (f) and (g) under group one of' the United States .questionnaire. Question (f) asks:' "Have the Arab Governments entered into any agreement among themselves with respect to Palestine?" Question (g) asks: "If so, what are the terms of the agreement?" .I observe that these questions were put bythe United States, and l observe that they want them to be spoIlSored by the Security Council. In bis last intervention the representative of the United . States was lighteously i.1.dignant because a member of the Security Council questioned, or wanted to know, for the purpose of information, about .a certain act on the part of the United States. The United States representative said that it was highly irnproprr for anybody to question acts of his Government. It 'séems to me thaf it is perfectly obvious that itis highly improper both for the United States and for the Security Council to question acts of Governments in the manner in which questions (f) and (g) are put. I donot understand how and why either the U~ited States or the f.iecurity Councilis inter- .ested in knowing what agreements the Arab Governments have entered' into between themselves about a territory which they have always regarded as being of the utmost interest to themselves and to their own security. If it Was highly improper for anybody to ask questions about acts of' the United States Government, it is highly improper for the' Security Council to put . questions (f) and (g) to the Arab States. Mahmoud Bey FAWZI (Egypt): I do not want to spoil anybody's lunch,including mine, by ullduly prolonging this meeting, but 1 have First of all, 1 want to thank the representative of the United States mast sincerely for ms answer to my question in relation to the expression "Arab areas" and "Jewish areas". My thanks to him do not exclude my disappointment, in one sense, and the confirmation of my preoccupation, in another, as 1 heard the definition he gave to the expressions "Arab areas" and "Jewishareas". His answer makes me repeat that it is not at all praper for PIe Security Council to indude these expressions in the questionnaire, especially as interpreted and explained to us by the representative of the United States. Ifthat were done, it would be extremely prejudicial. The expressions 'mean that we are already speakfug of Jewish areas as being those that the Jews daim for themselves in Palestine. 1 s,u'bmit that we would not, thereby, be acting eitb.er fairly or properly. 1.protest against such a suggestion with as much vehemence as.1 protested against the suggestion that we employ the expression "Provisiçmal Govemment of Israel". AlI this does not keep me from again expressing my thanks to the representative of the United States for being kind enough to answer my question. With the permission of the President, 1 should like to say a few additional words' in connexion with what the representative of the United States has said in answer to the repre:sentative of Syria. We suppose that the sovereignty of States is always respected and that it is very.highly considered in the minds of everyone. We are not here to question the legality or otherwise of the actions of Governments and independent States in order topas~ final judgment upon,them. B~t, undoubtedly, sorne of these actions have a definite relation to and a beàring on matters related to peace, security and stability, and they affect these matters. Sorne of these actions are very good, and sorne are not sa good; occasioIially they are, even very bad indeed, very dangerous,and they undermine peace and stability. If we 'Cannat stop these actions, the least we should' be allowed to do about the matter is to speak of Lhem and show onr feelings concerning them. We cannat do less than that. It is said, for example, that it is the Government of the United States of America's "oWilvemement business"-I am not repeatîng the words used by, therepresentative of the United States, 1 am trying to repeat what l understood-and that the (}overnment is quite free to recognize a dfJ-facto authority. That is true in a general way; but there are',cen;ain ,sta.D:da~ds of behaviour-ü' III may say si:> Wlthout WJShing to be hard or harsh Now, the same thing applies with regard ta its population. We have statistics and we have .maps; and 1 do not suppose that the Mandatory Power destroyed all its archives and aIl its books at the end of the Mandate. We might consult them. While 1 mention, in passing, that a great deal of what 1 ha,ve said applies ta the whole principle of self-determination, as we know it from international law and tradition, and as we know it according to the Charter of the United"Nations, 1 shall continue by saying something with regard to the last element ta be considered when it is a question of the existence of any authority. 1 shall have more ta say about that later. Thar last element is that of a real control. Can 1 be consid/;red ta be really in control of a territory that 1 have owned and, in but a very vague, fragmentary, and illusory manner, con~ trolled for only a few days, not knowing how long 1 shaH actually be able ta stay there? Can 1 be considered ta be in control of that territory justa few minutes from the time 1 say that 1 am in control of it? Certainly not: It is supposed-if we have not completely forgotten our international law and usage 'Jf international life-that· in arder that an authority may be recognizd as such, besides the various elements of which wè have spoken, they have to be masters of the land. According to any measure offéürness, we cannat consider that the Jews have beèn masters of the land just because they have been in sorne areas for several days-in a most unsettled manner-or just because they had declared a few minutes beforehand that They had set up sorne sort of State or authority, or whatever they want ta caU it; ail this not mentioning the very essential point which 1 take for granted, namely,that weshall When 1 go into a'territory legally and control it in àn orderly and legal way, in harmony with the realities of the population and of the h'l'!d, is it the same thing as when 1 go there in opposition ta all those realities? That is one of the various questions which, in conscience and in fairness, we must ask. 1 do not want ta say any more about this matter, but 1 think it is very essential, and it is not a mere matter of sending a questionnaire. It is right there at the root of the whole question of Palestine and of peace in the Middle East. /" ·The PRESIDENT (translated trom French): Befàre the interpretation of the Egyptian representative's statement begins, 1 would remind you that we have a meeting this afternoon, and that there are two items on the agenda for that meeting which seem to me less urgent than the Palestine question. 1 therefore propose that the Cou~cil should devote that meeting to the latter. The interpretation of the statement we have just heard will, in any case, be given at the beginning of that meeting, during which we shall be able to continue ,and conclude the discussion on the Palestine problem. TWO HUNDRED AND NINETY-FIFTH MEETING H eld at Lake Success, New York, on Tuesday, 18 May 1948, at 3 p.m.. President: Mr. A. PARODI (France). \ . Present: The representatives of the following countries: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, France, Syria, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom, United States of America.

ln accordance with the decision Ûtken this morning, the oilly item on this afternoon's agenda, which replaces the original one [document SiAgenda 295J, is consideration of the Palestinian question. If there is no objection, this agenda will be takèn as adopted. 56. ContinuatEon _of the discussion on the Palestine qu~stion At the invitation of the President, M ahmoud Bey Fawzi, the representative of Egyptj Mr. Malik, the representative of Lebanon; Jamal Bey Husseini, the 'representative of the Arab Higher Committee; and Mr. Eban, the representative of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, took their places at the Security Council table.